Author: Our Bureau
Publication: The Economic Times
Date: July 26, 2011
Rules out any loss to exchequer, says merely
followed NDA policies in issuing licences
Former telecom minister A Raja took inspiration
from Cuban communist leader Fidel Castro while launching a blistering attack
on the charges filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) against
him, saying there was no loss to the exchequer and that he merely followed
the policies of the BJP-led NDA regime in issuing new mobile permits. By doing
so, the 47-year-old MP argued, he had made mobile telephony more accessible
to the man on the street by breaking the "cartel" of incumbent GSM
operators.
"History will absolve me," Raja said, quoting the ailing communist
leader. He also claimed Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and former finance minister
P Chidambaram were aware of and had approved the equity dilution by two companies
caught in the alleged scam-Swan Telecom, renamed Etisalat DB, and Unitech
Wireless, now called Uninor. "The matter (about sale of equity by spectrum
licensees) was discussed between the prime minister and the then finance minister
(P Chidambaram)," Raja's counsel Sushil Kumar told the CBI special court.
The remark triggered a political firefight,
with the leader of the principal opposition party demanding the resignation
of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and P Chidambaram, who is now home minister.
This brought forth strong rebuttals from both the Congress and the government,
with Chidambaram and Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal ridiculing the resignation
demand.
"This kind of politics where you take
an accused's defence in court as proof and then ask for the resignation of
the prime minister or finance minister - I think, this is not only incorrect,
but also irresponsible," said Sibal.
The court, presided over by Judge OP Saini
in New Delhi's Patiala House complex, is hearing arguments for and against
the framing of charges against Raja and the owners and executives of Unitech
Wireless and Swan Telecom. The court can either dismiss the charges, which
will end the case, or can frame charges. Chidambaram, Sibal Rebut Charges
In the latter case, a formal trial will commence, with the prosecution and
defence calling witnesses for crossexamination.
In two reports, published on May 24 and 31,
this paper had reported Raja would argue in court that the nation's highest
political authorities were in the loop when it came to the allocation of telecom
licences to new operators.
"The then finance minister, who is now
home minister, had said in front of the prime minister that dilution of shares
does not amount to sale of 2G licence as per the corporate law," asserted
Raja's counsel, adding, "Let the Prime Minister deny this."
"When sale of equity does not amount
to sale of licence, there in no question of earning profit. How can (then)
be corruption there in this regard?" Kumar argued.
Later on, however, he clarified that the reference
to the PM was only with regard to policy and no personal allegation was intended.
Reacting to the BJP's call for his resignation,
Chidambaram said the party was targeting ministers not because of the 2G scam
but because it was scared of the ongoing probe into what he described as "Hindu
terror".
He also said there was no sale of stake by
Unitech and Swan Telecom to foreign partners. Instead, the two companies had
issued fresh shares to foreign investors, a fact that was discussed in the
presence of the PM, Chidambaram said. He said the finance ministry had only
examined whether Swan and Unitech were divesting stake, which was not allowed,
or raising fresh equity by issuing new shares. After examination of facts,
the latter turned out to be the case and the PM was informed of this, Chidambaram
told television channel Times NOW. He asserted that the DoT wanted entry fee
to remain at 2001 rates while the finance ministry had wanted it to be rediscovered
through an auction. While there was no comment from the Prime Minister's Office,
Sibal swung to the government's defence, saying the BJP's demand for the PM
and Chidambaram's resignation was "irresponsible".
He also stuck to his earlier stance ruling
out any loss on account of allocation of 2G mobile permits, stating that the
first-come-first-served policy followed by Raja obviously did not entail an
auction. He said the operational part of the CBI charges was that Raja fiddled
with the first-come-first-served policy by allegedly favouring operators such
as Unitech Wireless and Swan. The reference to losses in the CBI chargesheet
was mentioned as background, Sibal asserted at a press conference in Delhi.
Cbi Being Selective, Alleges Raja
In court, Raja's lawyer also questioned the
CBI's rationale of not investigating a 27% equity sale by Tata Teleservices
that fetched the company Rs 13,973 crore, and equity dilution by STel that
"earned it" Rs 2,230 crore, while treating Unitech and DB Realty's
equity expansion as offences. He accused the CBI of following a policy of
"pick and choose" by chargesheeting some and absolving the others.
"You can't pick and choose. The same
hand should apply to everyone," Kumar said while questioning the agency's
authority to decide on the loss to the exchequer. "Who is the CBI to
decide the loss? Let the government say so. Government has been screaming
that there's been zero loss. Bring the report of the loss, there is no certification
of any loss… The PM should come and say that this man caused a loss of
Rs 50,000 crore," he said.
Raja, in his defence, said, "My only
crime was to break the cartel of Airtel and Vodafone." He said his actions
were in public interest, and that by breaking what he described as the cartel
of the incumbent GSM operators, he made mobile telephony accessible to the
man on the street.
"It was my obligation to social justice
that every man on the street should have a mobile phone. I am a servant of
my people and I made the call rates of mobile phone so cheap that even a 'rickshaw
wala' or a maid servant can be seen using it," he said. "My actions
were in public interest."
Bharti Airtel and Vodafone did not respond
to emails sent by ET on Raja's charges.
Raja also rubbished the CBI's charge that
he conspired with Unitech and Swan to dish out new mobile permits saying there
was no evidence of this so-called conspiracy.
"How can there be a conspiracy? They (different companies wanting telecom
licences) are all trying for the same licence. There would be conflict of
interest. How can I conspire with one and not with other? These are selective
allegations… There's no material to show that there was a conspiracy,"
he said.
Claiming that he followed a policy laid down
by his predecessors, Raja said former telecom minister Arun Shourie distributed
26 licences, Dayanidhi Maran 25 licences and he 122 licences. "Numbers
make no difference, however, it is to be noted that none of them auctioned
the spectrum," he said. "If they had done no wrong, why am I being
questioned? Let them deny that they have not done what I did," he said.
Arguing in court that he had committed no
offence, the jailed minister said the offence would have been if spectrum
that was not supposed to be auctioned was indeed auctioned - but that was
not the case, so there cannot be an offence. "Which page in the chargesheet
says that I was supposed to auction. All files in this case are in my favour."
